linux-ext4 - RE: ext4 corruption on 17TB file system during power cycle test

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <2CE44BD3DBCF9541909CCB42F11CA392828B4D@SFO1EXC-MBXP06.nbttech.com>
Date:	Wed, 13 Jun 2012 14:30:06 +0000
From:	Ming Lei <Ming.Lei@...erbed.com>
To:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
CC:	"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: ext4 corruption on 17TB file system during power cycle test

We actually ran into problem in our real power cycle testing. We used fsck -p option and then mount the ext4 file system but during test after the power cycle, kernel found EXT4 error and then force ext4 mount become read only. Do you think the problem is inside kernel?

Thanks
M- 

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Sandeen [mailto:sandeen@...hat.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 7:11 AM
To: Ming Lei
Cc: linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ext4 corruption on 17TB file system during power cycle test

On 6/13/12 8:49 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
> I  have raid0 on 12 Seagate new 3TB sas drives and kernel version is
> 2.6.32SL6.1 version. The ext4 is mounted with barrier on, delalloc 
> on/off has almost the same result.
> 
> I ran fs_mark -F -t 10 -D 1000 -N 1000 -n 1000000 -s 40 -S 2 into 4 
> iterations(reported count of 40000000) and then power cycled the box.
> After the box came up, I ran fsck -f to check inconsistency. On ext4 
> FS 7.5TB and 16TB, I got no fsck error; but on 17TB, 21TB and 33TB, I 
> got big chunk of fsck errors.
> 
> My question is: is this known issue and any fix?

What version of e2fsprogs?  That'd be the critical first question.

There was at least one log recovery fix that went in post-1.42.3:

commit 3b693d0b03569795d04920a04a0a21e5f64ffedc
Author: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Date:   Mon May 21 21:30:45 2012 -0400

    e2fsck: fix 64-bit journal support

    64-bit journal support was broken; we weren't using the high bits from
    the journal descriptor blocks!  We were also using "unsigned long" for
    the journal block numbers, which would be a problem on 32-bit systems.

    Signed-off-by: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>


1.42.4 was just released yesterday, you might retest that version.

-Eric
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html